Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1887-10-04


officers labors he turned over to Mr..
Witt when inc placed the case in his
hands.
NIB. WITT.
Commonwealth 's-AttorEcy Samuel E.
Witt was the next witness. He, like
Navor Carriugton. made his statement
without being sworn. The other wit
u,ss,s were sworn 10y Mr.. Crump, who
is notary public. Mr.. Witt said he
had uo information that would throw
legal light on the subject Having
heard many Umors he had made
70 thorough examination, but had
neither the evidence nor the law
that would Justify him in insttu-
ting proceedings IN the criminal courts
of kiclmond. lie had information
that there was evidence in Washington,
but he could not get it in Richmond.
He had made personal application IN
Washington for tie telegram, bat could
not obtain it. lie was then ac-
companied by Colonel Minitree, whose
name was signed to the tele-
gram lie talked the matter over
with District Attorney Wouhington,
OF Washington. that ne Was to inyesti-
gate ocltmm legal questions here and
Mr. Northington and his assistants
Wcra 10 investigate the matter in Wash
uetou. Tie (WitO had performed his
duty and written to Mr. NouhIngtOn,
but had never heard anything from
that Gentleman. The gist of Mr.. Witt 8
evidence was that the evidence WAS IN
Washington and that in his opinion, If
q prosecution lies ut all, II must take
place in Washington, where the offence
was committed. There was some ques-
ton whether the forgery OF a telegram
could hc proven criminal offence.
DETECTIVE WREN.
Detective John Wren was next intro
duccd, and his testimony was looked
forward to with a great deal OF interest
he began 10y handing to the committee
AZ, envelope containing two tracings OF
the telegram and number of letters
written 10y Mr.. Murphy. These were
handed him before he went to
Washington by Mr.. Witt and Mr.
Otley.
Mr.. Wren said that in Washington
he SAW the boy who filed the telegram,
aud was proceeding, in answer to Mr..
Mercdith's questions, to relate the con
ytrsation that took place between them,
when Mr.. Waddin objected. lie held
that hearsay testimony could not be
accepted. lie lad not objected to the
testimony Of Mayor Carrlngton ana
Commonwealth 's-Attorney Witt, but he
thought to accept Mr.. Wren 5 was gong
too far.
MIR. Meredith thought this was the
only way in which the committee could
discharge the duties assigned 1t. IL
WAS not sitting as a court OF inquiry,
Int 10 investigate this matter thorough.
lv The evidence of this witness could
not Of course, affect anybody, but
would give the committee some idea oi
What il might be expected to prove by
the Washington witnesses II II Is de-
tcrmined for the committee to so there
and continue the investigation.
Mr.. Crump cOncurred IN the views oi
lir Meredith. and the committee, after
a lengthy argument by counsel de-
cidt d 10 allow all of the witnesses 70
tcll everything that they knew or had
heard.
WREN CONTINUES.
Continuing his testimony, Mr. wren
said the name Of the young man VINO
carried the telegram in Washington
WAS John Leonard, and he was EN-
Moved at the Baltimore and ONO OIL
fee. This young man described tue
man who wrote the telegram as being
about twenty-five or twenty-slx years
old tall, forid complexion, wear
mo dark clothes, "a broad-Drlm
straw hat, and dark moustaehe. The
vonno man would know the party
Wines knew that in the summer Mur,,
nby wore "a largo-brim straw hat ana
dark clothes. w
Mr.. Wren said while in Washington
he also saw General Clarke, snperlii-
tendent of the Baltimore and ONO
TeIeorsph Company, who agreed TO let
Colonel Minitree see the original teio-
gram. .. 10 soa Colonel
Minitree, who agreed 70 go to the sele'